Fight For America: ObamaCare

Harry Reid and Tom Coburn Agree: Obamacare Was Designed to Fail, Pave Way for Single-Payer

In just about seven weeks, people will be able to start buying Obamacare-approved insurance plans through the new health care exchanges.

But already, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is predicting those plans, and the whole system of distributing them, will eventually be moot.

Reid said he thinks the country has to “work our way past” insurance-based health care during a Friday night appearance on Vegas PBS’ program “Nevada Week in Review.”

“What we’ve done with Obamacare is have a step in the right direction, but we’re far from having something that’s going to work forever,” Reid said.

When then asked by panelist Steve Sebelius whether he meant ultimately the country would have to have a health care system that abandoned insurance as the means of accessing it, Reid said: “Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.”

The idea of introducing a single-payer national health care system to the United States, or even just a public option, sent lawmakers into a tizzy back in 2009, when Reid was negotiating the health care bill.

And so we have a rare moment of bipartisan agreement in the United States Senate. Reid now appears to concur with Republican senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who has has been warning for quite some time that Obamacare was “rigged to fail” in order to pave the way for a total government takeover of the health insurance industry.

“More than two years after the passage of Obamacare, the data overwhelming show the law will fail to achieve its core objectives of lowering costs and improving access,” Coburn wrote in 2012. “That, ironically, may have been the design. By making private insurance unaffordable for everyone, it will become available to no one. All that will be left is government-centered, government-run, single-payer health care.”

As liberal Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein said in 2008, organizations on the left pushing for health care reform were pursuing a “sneaky strategy” to “put in place something that over time the natural incentives … move it to single payer.”

So the big question on the left and right isn’t really whether or not Obamacare will eventually fail, but what comes after it fails.

When Obamacare starts to unravel, will the American people really trust the Democrats who designed it to fix it by giving the government more power and more control? Or will Obamacare’s failure provide an opportunity to repeal it and replace it with a more conservative, free-market reform?

Reid says Obamacare just a step toward eventual single-payer system

In just about seven weeks, people will be able to start buying Obamacare-approved insurance plans through the new health care exchanges.

But already, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is predicting those plans, and the whole system of distributing them, will eventually be moot.

Reid said he thinks the country has to “work our way past” insurance-based health care during a Friday night appearance on Vegas PBS’ program “Nevada Week in Review.”

“What we’ve done with Obamacare is have a step in the right direction, but we’re far from having something that’s going to work forever,” Reid said.

When then asked by panelist Steve Sebelius whether he meant ultimately the country would have to have a health care system that abandoned insurance as the means of accessing it, Reid said: “Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.”

The idea of introducing a single-payer national health care system to the United States, or even just a public option, sent lawmakers into a tizzy back in 2009, when Reid was negotiating the health care bill.

“We had a real good run at the public option … don’t think we didn’t have a tremendous number of people who wanted a single-payer system,” Reid said on the PBS program, recalling how then-Sen. Joe Lieberman’s opposition to the idea of a public option made them abandon the notion and start from scratch.

Eventually, Reid decided the public option was unworkable.

“We had to get a majority of votes,” Reid said. “In fact, we had to get a little extra in the Senate, we have to get 60.”

Reid cited the post-WWII auto industry labor negotiations that made employer-backed health insurance the norm, remarking that “we’ve never been able to work our way out of that” before predicting that Congress would someday end the insurance-based health care system.

Reid also had some strong words for Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval and Sen. Dean Heller concerning their ongoing dispute with Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz over shipments of low-level nuclear waste from Oak Ridge, Tenn., to Nevada.

Sandoval disputes the existence of “many memos” that Moniz said were signed between state and federal officials, permitting the import of the spent fuel rods. Heller has asked Moniz to clarify the existence of the memos, which Moniz first referred to in testimony before the Senate Energy Committee on July 30.

Reid suggested that Sandoval and Heller were “flailing away” with their complaints, before establishing the facts, which Reid said he “just do[es]n’t think we have.”

“If there are these memos flying around then somebody should be able to find them someplace, but this is not the point,” Reid said. “Gov. Sandoval knows his powers are limited. This is interstate commerce … you can’t just say ‘we’re not going to take it.’ It doesn’t work that way.”

Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property
located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012
(that is, from the third quarter to the fourth quarter), according to the "second" estimate released by the
Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the third quarter, real GDP increased 3.1 percent.
The GDP estimate released today is based on more complete source data than were available for
the "advance" estimate issued last month. In the advance estimate, real GDP declined 0.1 percent. The
upward revision to the percent change in real GDP is smaller than the average revision from the advance
to second estimate of 0.5 percentage point. While today’s release has revised the direction of change in
real GDP, the general picture of the economy for the fourth quarter remains largely the same as what
was presented last month (for more information, see "Revisions" on page 3).
The increase in real GDP in the fourth quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from
personal consumption expenditures (PCE), nonresidential fixed investment, and residential fixed
investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from private inventory investment, federal
government spending, exports, and state and local government spending. Imports, which are a
subtraction in the calculation of GDP, decreased.
The deceleration in real GDP in the fourth quarter primarily reflected downturns in private
inventory investment, in federal government spending, in exports, and in state and local government
spending that were partly offset by an upturn in nonresidential fixed investment, a larger decrease in
imports, and an acceleration in PCE.
_______
FOOTNOTE. Quarterly estimates are expressed at seasonally adjusted annual rates, unless otherwise
specified. Quarter-to-quarter dollar changes are differences between these published estimates. Percent
changes are calculated from unrounded data and are annualized. "Real" estimates are in chained (2005)
dollars. Price indexes are chain-type measures.
This news release is available on BEA’s Web site along with the Technical Note and Highlights
related to this release. For information on revisions, see "Revisions to GDP, GDI, and Their Major
Components".
_______
Final sales of computers added 0.10 percentage point to the fourth-quarter change in real GDP
after adding 0.11 percentage point to the third-quarter change. Motor vehicle output added 0.19
percentage point to the fourth-quarter change in real GDP after subtracting 0.25 percentage point from
the third-quarter change.
The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents,
increased 1.5 percent in the fourth quarter, 0.2 percentage point more than in the advance estimate; this
index increased 1.4 percent in the third quarter. Excluding food and energy prices, the price index for
gross domestic purchases increased 1.1 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 1.2
percent in the third.
Real personal consumption expenditures increased 2.1 percent in the fourth quarter, compared
with an increase of 1.6 percent in the third. Durable goods increased 13.8 percent, compared with an
increase of 8.9 percent. Nondurable goods increased 0.1 percent, compared with an increase of 1.2
percent. Services increased 0.9 percent, compared with an increase of 0.6 percent.
Real nonresidential fixed investment increased 9.7 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to a
decrease of 1.8 percent in the third. Nonresidential structures increased 5.8 percent; it was unchanged in
the third quarter. Equipment and software increased 11.3 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to a
decrease of 2.6 percent in the third. Real residential fixed investment increased 17.5 percent, compared
with an increase of 13.5 percent.
Real exports of goods and services decreased 3.9 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to an
increase of 1.9 percent in the third. Real imports of goods and services decreased 4.5 percent, compared
with a decrease of 0.6 percent.
Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment decreased 14.8 percent
in the fourth quarter, in contrast to an increase of 9.5 percent in the third. National defense decreased
22.0 percent, in contrast to an increase of 12.9 percent. Nondefense increased 1.8 percent, compared
with an increase of 3.0 percent. Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross
investment decreased 1.3 percent, in contrast to an increase of 0.3 percent.
The change in real private inventories subtracted 1.55 percentage points from the fourth-quarter
change in real GDP, after adding 0.73 percentage point to the third-quarter change. Private businesses
increased inventories $12.0 billion in the fourth quarter, following increases of $60.3 billion in the third
and $41.4 billion in the second.
Real final sales of domestic product -- GDP less change in private inventories -- increased 1.7
percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 2.4 percent in the third.
Gross domestic purchases
Real gross domestic purchases -- purchases by U.S. residents of goods and services wherever
produced -- decreased 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to an increase of 2.6 percent in the
third.
Current-dollar GDP
Current-dollar GDP -- the market value of the nation's output of goods and services -- increased
1.0 percent, or $40.2 billion, in the fourth quarter to a level of $15,851.2 billion. In the third quarter,
current-dollar GDP increased 5.9 percent, or $225.4 billion.
Revisions
The "second" estimate of the fourth-quarter percent change in GDP is 0.2 percentage point, or
$9.2 billion, more than the advance estimate issued last month, primarily reflecting an upward revision
to exports, a downward revision to imports, and an upward revision to nonresidential fixed investment
that were partly offset by a downward revision to private inventory investment.
Advance Estimate Second Estimate
(Percent change from preceding quarter)
Real GDP....................................... -0.1 0.1
Current-dollar GDP............................. 0.5 1.0
Gross domestic purchases price index........... 1.3 1.5
2012 GDP
Real GDP increased 2.2 percent in 2012 (that is, from the 2011 annual level to the 2012 annual
level), compared with an increase of 1.8 percent in 2011.
The increase in real GDP in 2012 primarily reflected positive contributions from personal
consumption expenditures (PCE), nonresidential fixed investment, exports, residential fixed investment,
and private inventory investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from federal
government spending and from state and local government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in
the calculation of GDP, increased.
The acceleration in real GDP in 2012 primarily reflected a deceleration in imports, upturns in
residential fixed investment and in private inventory investment and smaller decreases in state and local
government spending and in federal government spending that were partly offset by decelerations in
PCE, exports, and nonresidential fixed investment.
The price index for gross domestic purchases increased 1.7 percent in 2012, compared with an
increase of 2.5 percent in 2011.
Current-dollar GDP increased 4.0 percent, or $605.8 billion, in 2012 to a level of $15,681.5
billion, compared with an increase of 4.0 percent, or $576.8 billion, in 2011.
During 2012 (that is, measured from the fourth quarter of 2011 to the fourth quarter of 2012),
real GDP increased 1.6 percent. Real GDP increased 2.0 percent during 2011. The price index for gross
domestic purchases increased 1.5 percent during 2012, compared with an increase of 2.5 percent during
2011.
* * *
BEA's national, international, regional, and industry estimates; the Survey of Current Business;
and BEA news releases are available without charge on BEA's Web site at www.bea.gov. By visiting
the site, you can also subscribe to receive free e-mail summaries of BEA releases and announcements.
* * *
Next release -- March 28, 2013 at 8:30 A.M. EDT for:
Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2012 (Third Estimate)
Corporate Profits: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2012

Michael Masters Chairman, Better Markets Inc Michael W Masters is the founder and Managing Member of Masters Capital Management, an investment management firm. He is also a Partner in Masters Capital Nanotechnology, a venture capital fund. Mr Masters, an expert on the topic of commodities speculation and financial reform, has testified before many Congressional committees and government agencies, including the House Energy Subcommittee, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. Recently, he participated in joint SEC-CFTC roundtable discussions on a variety of security-based swaps issues. Speaking out about the far-reaching harmful effects of unregulated commodities speculation and the need for financial reform, Mr Masters has made numerous appearances in media outlets around the world. He has also addressed consumer and corporate groups, and has served as an expert panellist before international and investor groups. He is the founder of Better Markets, a Washington, DC-based non-profit, non-partisan organization established to promote transparency and accountability in the financial markets for the public interest. He was the 2004 winner of the “Open Your Heart” award from Hedge Funds Care and is a 1989 graduate of the University of Tennessee.
The OPEC International Seminar is now regarded as one of the premier events on the world energy calendar, bringing together Ministers from OPEC Member Countries and other oil-producing countries, heads of intergovernmental organizations, chief executives of national and international oil companies, other industry leaders, renowned academics, analysts and media.
The 5th OPEC International Seminar, held in Vienna’s historic Hofburg Palace on 13–14 June 2012, focussing on the theme ‘Petroleum: Fuelling Prosperity, Supporting Sustainability’. The latest in the series of Seminars, which began in 2001, provided fresh impetus to key industry issues and developed existing and new avenues of dialogue and cooperation.

“…IntercontinentalExchange, Inc., known as ICE, is an American financial company that operates Internet-based marketplaces which trade futures and over-the-counter (OTC) energy and commodity contracts as well as derivative financial products. While the company’s original focus was energy products (crude and refined oil, natural gas, power, and emissions), recent acquisitions have expanded its activity into the “soft” commodities (sugar, cotton and coffee), foreign exchange and equity index futures.

In 2011, ICE and NASDAQ OMX Group joined forces to bid against Deutsche Börse after the latter announced a $9.5 billion deal to merge with NYSE Euronext. The two U.S. bidders and then the German exchange ultimately withdrew after their bids encountered regulatory antitrust resistance. In December 2012 NYSE Euronext agreed to be acquired by ICE pending regulator approval.

Contracts sold through ICE Futures U.S. are processed through a subsidiary, ICE Clear U.S. (ICEUS). In May 2008, ICE launched its own Clearing House, ICE Clear, with divisions for Europe, US, Canada & Trust (ICEU).[2]

Headquartered in Atlanta, ICE also has offices in Calgary, Chicago, Houston, London, New York and Singapore, with regional telecommunications hubs in Chicago, New York, London and Singapore.

History

In the late 1990s, Jeffrey Sprecher, ICE’s founder, chairman, and Chief Executive Officer, acquired Continental Power Exchange, Inc. with the objective of developing an Internet-based platform to provide a more transparent and efficient market structure for OTC energy commodity trading. In May 2000, IntercontinentalExchange (ICE) was established, with its founding shareholders representing some of the world’s largest energy traders. The company’s stated mission was to transform OTC trading by providing an open, accessible, multi-dealer, around-the-clock electronic energy exchange. The new exchange offered the trading community better price transparency, more efficiency, greater liquidity and lower costs than manual trading.

In June 2001, ICE expanded its business into futures trading by acquiring the International Petroleum Exchange (IPE), now ICE Futures Europe, which operated Europe’s leading open-outcry energy futures exchange. Since 2003, ICE has partnered with the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) to host its electronic marketplaces. In April 2005, the entire ICE portfolio of energy futures became fully electronic. In April 2010 ICE bought CCX’s owner Climate Exchange PLC for 395 million pounds ($622 million). Climate Exchange PLC also owns the European Climate Exchange (ECX).[3]

ICE became a publicly traded company on November 16, 2005, and was added to the Russell 1000 Index on June 30, 2006. The company expanded rapidly in 2007, acquiring the New York Board of Trade (NYBOT),[4] ChemConnect (a chemical commodity market), and the Winnipeg Commodity Exchange. In March 2007 ICE made an unsuccessful $9.9 billion bid for the Chicago Board of Trade, which was instead acquired by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.[5]

NYSE Euronext

In February 2011, in the wake of an announced merger of NYSE Euronext with Deutsche Borse, speculation developed that ICE and Nasdaq could mount a counter-bid of their own for NYSE Euronext. ICE was thought to be looking to acquire the American exchange’s derivatives business, Nasdaq its cash equities business. As of the time of the speculation, “NYSE Euronext’s market value was $9.75 billion. Nasdaq was valued at $5.78 billion, while ICE was valued at $9.45 billion.”[7] Late in the month, Nasdaq was reported to be considering asking either ICE or the Chicago Merc (CME) to join in what would be probably be an $11-12 billion counterbid for NYSE.[8] On April 1, ICE and Nasdaq made an $11.3 billion offer which was rejected April 10 by NYSE. Another week later, ICE and Nasdaq sweetened their offer, including a $.17 increase per share to $42.67 and a $350 million breakup fee if the deal were to encounter regulatory trouble. The two said the offer was a $2 billion (21%) premium over the Deutsche offer and that they had fully committed financing of $3.8 billion from lenders to finance the deal.[9] The Justice Department, also in April, “initiated an antitrust review of the proposal, which would have brought nearly all U.S. stock listings under a merged Nasdaq-NYSE.” In May, saying it “became clear that we would not be successful in securing regulatory approval,” the Nasdaq and ICE withdrew their bid.[10] The European Commission then blocked the Deutsche merger on 1 February 2012, citing the fact that the merged company would have a near monopoly.[11][12]

In December 2012, ICE announced it would buy NYSE Euronext for $8 billion, pending regulatory approval. Jeffrey Sprecher will retain his position as Chairman and CEO.[13] The boards of directors of both ICE and NYSE Euronext approved the acquisition.[14]

Democrats Have No Plan to Bring Down Rising Gas Prices, But They Do Have a Plan to Make Them Go Up

(3.22.12) Obama Defends Handling of Keystone Pipeline

Fox News Blames Obama For Gas Prices

Background Articles and Videos

Scarce Oil? U.S. Has 60 Times More Than Obama Claims

By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

“…U.S. Awash In Oil

But the figure Obama uses — proved oil reserves — vastly undercounts how much oil the U.S. actually contains. In fact, far from being oil-poor, the country is awash in vast quantities — enough to meet all the country’s oil needs for hundreds of years.

The U.S. has 22.3 billion barrels of proved reserves, a little less than 2% of the entire world’s proved reserves, according to the Energy Information Administration. But as the EIA explains, proved reserves “are a small subset of recoverable resources,” because they only count oil that companies are currently drilling for in existing fields.

When you look at the whole picture, it turns out that there are vast supplies of oil in the U.S., according to various government reports. Among them:

At least 86 billion barrels of oil in the Outer Continental Shelf yet to be discovered, according to the government’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

About 24 billion barrels in shale deposits in the lower 48 states, according to EIA.

Up to 2 billion barrels of oil in shale deposits in Alaska’s North Slope, says the U.S. Geological Survey.

Up to 12 billion barrels in ANWR, according to the USGS.

As much as 19 billion barrels in the Utah tar sands, according to the Bureau of Land Management.

Then, there’s the massive Green River Formation in Wyoming, which according to the USGS contains a stunning 1.4 trillion barrels of oil shale — a type of oil released from sedimentary rock after it’s heated.

Poll: Public Anger Over Gasoline Prices Hurting Obama

By SEAN HIGGINS, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

“…”Most Americans do not give President Obama good grades for handling rising gasoline prices. Only 24% give him an A or B; 46% give him a D or F,” said Raghavan Mayur, president of TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, which conducted the poll.

Just 8% gave him an excellent grade on the issue; 32% said his actions are unacceptable.

Americans back drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 54%-38%, drilling in American territorial waters, 66%-25%, and hydraulic fracturing shale rock for crude in the Mountain West and elsewhere, 67%-22%.

Such numbers clearly have the White House worried. It conceded as much in a statement Monday: “Today’s high gas prices are a painful reminder that there’s much more work to do to free ourselves from our dependence on foreign oil and take control of our energy future.”

The administration did note that domestic oil and natural gas production are at an eight-year high. Republicans counter that this is the Bush administration’s work. Just last week the administration successfully lobbied Senate Democrats to filibuster a bill that would have opened the Keystone XL pipeline to America. That was the second time the White House has killed it. …”

US sees lower 2011 oil use, becomes net exporter

US oil demand in all of 2011 dropped 1.8%, or by 345,000 bpd, from 2010 to a two-year low of 18.835 million bpd, government data released Wednesday show. US oil output climbed 7.4% to 5.877 million bpd, the highest level since 1999.

By DAVID BIRD

“…US oil demand in all of 2011 dropped 1.8%, or by 345,000 bpd, from 2010 to a two-year low of 18.835 million bpd, government data released Wednesday show.
Demand dropped for the fifth of the past six years, and followed a 2.2% drop a year ago, data from the Energy Information Administration show.
Demand for gasoline, the most widely used petroleum product in the world’s biggest oil-consuming nation, fell 2.9%, to a 10-year low of 8.736 million bpd.

The drop came as the nationwide average retail price of regular gasoline for all of 2011 set a record at $3.521/gal, up 26.6% from the prior year, EIA data show.
US oil output climbed 7.4% to 5.877 million bpd, the highest level since 1999.

Production rose for a third straight year, which is the longest string of annual increases since the early 1980s. …”

US Oil Use Down 1.2% in 2011

“…U.S. oil demand fell 1.2 percent to 18.9 million barrels a day last year, trade group American Petroleum Institute said Friday.

Early data from the federal Energy Information Administration issued Jan. 10 showed a 1.6 percent, or 310,000 barrels a day, drop to 18.87 million barrels a day. The International Energy Agency, the oil-market watchdog for the major industrialized nations, such as the U.S., that make up the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, this week estimated a decline of 1.8 percent, or 340,000 barrels a day, in U.S. demand, to 18.84 million barrels a day.

The API said its estimate for 2011 showed that, except for 2008, the drop in demand was the most in the last decade. December 2011 U.S. petroleum deliveries, a measure of demand, were down 5.9 percent from a year earlier, to a 15-year low of 18.6 million barrels a day.

Demand for gasoline, the most widely used U.S. petroleum product, fell 4.3 percent in December from a year ago, to 8.531 million barrels a day. Annual demand was 2.1 percent lower, at 8.803 million barrels a day.

“The weakness in gasoline demand in 2011 reflected the overall weakness in consumer spending,” said John Felmy, API chief economist. Despite the decline in demand for refined products, supplies remained ample, with gasoline production for the year averaging a record high of 9.1 million barrels a day, up 0.5 percent from 2010. Distillate production, at 4.5 million barrels a day, was up 6.1 percent for the year. Refinery inputs fell by 1.5 percent in 2011 compared with 2010.

Total petroleum imports dropped 5.6 percent in 2011, API said. Although up slightly in December, crude-oil imports for the year fell by 3.4 percent. Imports of refined products dropped 14 percent for the year and were down more than 33 percent for December.

Total petroleum exports–almost all of which were product exports–jumped 25.5 percent in 2011 compared with 2010. …”

Space shuttle Atlantis makes final landing

Private enterprise takes over space race

Peter Diamandis on the X PRIZE and Private Space Flight

Peter Diamandis: Taking the next giant leap in space

Bluffing Millions in Financial Backing – Peter Diamandis (X Prize)

“Inspired by Charles Lindberg’s Spirit of St. Louis, X PRIZE founder and space entrepreneur Peter Diamandis explains to interviewer George Zachary of Charles River Ventures that offering a high profile cash reward can often be more financially advantageous – and more aggressive in moving forward a societal push – than simply funding a good idea. Diamandis describes his incredible quest for funding, pitching hundreds of potential benefactors without success. Not to be deterred, he announced the first X PRIZE contest with no competing teams and not a penny of the $10 million prize money on hand. His unbelievable tale grows even longer as he describes how funding came from a bet placed with a space insurance company, and how he had to scramble for the $50 thousand premium every month.”

Peter Diamandis – The best way to predict the future

“…Peter Diamandis, Chairman and Co-Founder of Singularity University, discusses the best way to predict the future, and shares his personal philosophies on innovation and the commercial space industry. Flimed at Singularity University’s Executive Program, March 2010. …”

Falcon Heavy

Falcon 9 Super Heavy

SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Launch

Interview with Ken Bowersox, SpaceX Vice President

SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket #3

Falcon/Dragon: ISS Cargo Resupply

“…A 60-second long test firing of the Falcon 9 Flight 3 second stage, conducted June 28, 2011 at the SpaceX Test Facility in McGregor. Texas. The Merlin Vacuum second stage engine generates 92,500 lb of force in vacuum, and operates with a vacuum specific impulse of 342 seconds – the highest efficiency ever for an American hydrocarbon rocket engine. In flight the engine ignites about 3 minutes after launch, delivering the Dragon spacecraft to orbit about 6 minutes later.

Atlantis has landed, ending NASA’s shuttle era

“…The space shuttle Atlantis glided home through a clear moonlit sky on Thursday to complete a 13-day cargo run to the International Space Station and a 30-year odyssey for NASA’s shuttle program.

Commander Chris Ferguson gently steered the 100-tonne spaceship high overhead, then nose-dived toward the swamp-surrounded landing strip at the Kennedy Space Center, a few miles (kilometers) from where Atlantis will go on display as a museum piece.

Double sonic booms shattered the predawn silence around the space center, the last time residents will hear the distinctive sound of a shuttle coming home.

Astronaut Barry Wilmore from Mission Control answered back, “We’ll take this opportunity to congratulate you Atlantis, as well as the thousands of passionate individuals across this great space-faring nation who truly empowered this incredible spacecraft, which for three decades has inspired millions around the globe.”

Background Articles and Videos

Dr. Peter H. Diamandis

“…Dr. Peter H. Diamandis (born May 20, 1961, in The Bronx, New York City, New York), of Greek immigrant parents, is considered a key figure in the development of the personal spaceflight industry, having created many space-related businesses or organizations. He is the Founder and Chairman of the X PRIZE Foundation, an educational non-profit prize institute whose mission is to create radical breakthroughs for the benefit of humanity.[1]

His foundation is best known for offering the $10 million Ansari X PRIZE for private-sector manned spaceflight, a prize that was won in October 2004 by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen and famed aviation designer Burt Rutan with SpaceShipOne, the world’s first non-government piloted spacecraft. More recently, Diamandis has created the Rocket Racing League. Born as a cross between Indy car racing and rocket-powered flight, RRL is developing a brand-new motor sport.

In addition to serving as chairman of the X PRIZE Foundation, Diamandis is also the CEO and co-founder of Zero Gravity Corporation, which offers parabolic weightless flights to the general public. He is also the co-Founder and a Director of Space Adventures, Ltd, the company that has flown eight private citizens on Soyuz to the International Space Station. …”

“Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole—with their common aim of legal plunder—constitute socialism.”

“We have tried so many things; when shall we try the simplest of all: freedom.”

~Frederic Bastiat

Give it a listen!

Segment 1: 3,500,000 Million Americans Unemployed in March 2011 Still Exceeds Great Depression High of 13,000,000 In March 1933–The Obama Depressions Continues–Bureau of Labor Statistics: 8.8% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) vs. Gallup Unemployment Rate of 10.0%–Nonfarm Payroll Increased By 216,000–The Government Makes The Depression Worse!–Videos

Segment 3: Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–A Jet Plane To Prosperity Not A Path To Prosperity–Videos

Segment 4: Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!–Videos

Chris Horner On Obama Energy Policy

“…Crude oil, refining, distribution & marketing, and taxes are the four major cost components for estimates of the retail price of a gallon of gasoline:

Crude oil – the major feedstock used to produce gasoline. This portion of the gasoline price is represented by the cost of crude oil purchased by refiners.

Refining – processing the crude oil into gasoline. The refining portion of the gasoline price is the spread between the cost of crude oil purchased by refiners and the wholesale price of gasoline. This spread represents both the costs and profits associated with the refining process.

Distribution & Marketing (Retail) – the part of the supply chain where wholesale gasoline is brought to a retail station and sold to the final consumer. This portion of the gasoline price is the retail price minus the other three price components. It represents both the costs and profits associated with selling retail gasoline to the final consumer.

Taxes – The Federal Government levies a tax of 18.4 cents on each gallon of gasoline, and the States levy an average tax of 22 cents on each gallon. This does not account for all State and local taxes, such as sales taxes, so this component, ranging from 7.5 to 37.5 cents per gallon across States, is probably understated (and the Distribution and Marketing component correspondingly overstated). …”

MAJOR REDUCTIONS IN CARBON EMISSIONS ARE NOT WORTH THE MONEY DEBATE: PETER Huber

Bjorn Lomborg – The Facts about the Environment

Bjorn Lomborg – The Facts about the Environment (part 2)

Bjorn Lomborg – The Facts about the Environment (part 3)

Forget about trying to decrease the demand for energy by wage, price and production controls and government regulations and executive orders.

Forget about trying to decrease the supply of energy by banning drilling and not approving permits to drill for oil and gas and build electrical power plants and oil refineries.

The United States government should not be in the energy or real estate business by trying to pick winners and losers with government subsidies and regulations.

The government is the problem by it pervasive interference and intervention into both the energy, transportation, agriculture and real estate sectors of the economy.

Government produces nothing but uncertainty, inflation and massive debt.

If the Federal and state governments simply got out of the way the United States economy could double its rate of growth with a full employment.

Instead the United States economy now has more government employees than employees in the manufacturing sector.

Both Federal and state governments collect more in taxes from energy suppliers than the profits earned by energy companies.

The professional politicians of both political parties together with the government bureaucracies have become a drag on the economy and a threat to the liberties of the American people.

Get Federal and state governmenst out of business and businesses out of goverments.

First, permanently shut-down the Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture.

Second, sell off Federal lands to the highest bidders.

Third, lift all bans on oil and gas exploration on land and at sea.

Fourth, end all subsidies and mandates starting with ethanol.

Obama and Ethanol

PA Approves Higher Ethanol Fuel Blend for More Cars

Myth: Corn Ethanol is Great

The Ethanol Myth

Biofuels & Ethanol: The Real Story

Food Prices Rise to ‘Dangerous Levels’

Fifth, drill, drill, drill.

Dramatically increase the supply of all forms of energy fuels including coal, nuclear, natural gas,and petroleum used for electrical power generation, transportation and heating.

The United States does not need an energy policy.

The United States and the American people are perfectly capable of producing all of the energy it needs from domestic sources.

This requies Federal and State governments to stop government intervention into the economy in the form of regulations, taxes, subsidies, and endless lawsuits.

What the United States needs to do is unleash free enterprise to produce the cheapest energy possible whatever the fuel source.

If wind and solar energy cannot make it in the market place without government subsidies, then stop the subsidies now.

If ethanol requires a government mandate to force Americans to use have it in their gasoline, then repeal the mandate now.

Obama Hates US…

DRILL! DRILL!! DRILL!!!

Take decisions about energy, transportation, agriculture and real estate out of the hands of the government and put these decision in our hands–the hands of the American people.

In Our Hands: American Free Enterprise, Anti-Communism, and the Cold War (1950)

With less than 5% of the world population and less than 6% of world’s land, the United States today produces over 20% of the world’s gross domestic product. Sixty years ago the United States produced nearly 50% of the world gross domestic product!.

Put the American people back to work in a peace and prosperity economy and a constitutional republic.

Vote progressive radical socialists out of office including President Obama with his so-called energy policy with his master plan.

” In spite of the anticapitalistic policies of all governments and of almost all political parties, the capitalist mode of production is still fulfilling its social function in supplying the consumers with more, better and cheaper goods.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Planned Chaos, page 15

“Capitalism means free enterprise, sovereignty of the consumers in economic matters, and sovereignty of the voters in political matters. Socialism means full government control of every sphere of the individuals life and the unrestricted supremacy of the government in its capacity as central board of production management.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Bureaucracy, page 10

Background Articles and Videos

President Obama on Green Energy

Taking lawmakers to coal plants and a coal mine in 2010

How a coal power station works

Oil Crises and History

By Ed Wallace

“…Then the most overlooked story of all came out: Oil Movements, the British firm that tracks oil shipments worldwide, pointed out that OPEC nations were already shipping less oil last month. Not because of any uprisings or closures of oil fields as in Libya, but because oil shipments always fall this time of year. Refineries worldwide go down for maintenance, preparing to switch to summer fuels for the northern hemisphere and winter fuels for the southern regions.

In a nutshell, the system already has some slack because refineries don’t want as much oil right now.

Here in America, oil marketers have not picked up oil in certain Texas counties because there’s a shortage of tankers and rail cars to carry all of the crude available. That’s because refiners want oil from the Midwest and EF Sour Crude. Those carry a discount right now, which improves refiners’ profits.

Basically, oil prices are once again being over-hyped based on speculation. This time the only legitimate fear is that, if Saudi Arabia comes undone, a real oil crisis might break out. But that possibility is remote. …”

“…

“…The total estimated amount of oil in an oil reservoir, including both producible and non-producible oil, is called oil in place. However, because of reservoir characteristics and limitations in petroleum extraction technologies, only a fraction of this oil can be brought to the surface, and it is only this producible fraction that is considered to be reserves. The ratio of producible oil reserves to total oil in place for a given field is often referred to as the recovery factor. Recovery factors vary greatly among oil fields. The recovery factor of any particular field may change over time based on operating history and in response to changes in technology and economics. The recovery factor may also rise over time if additional investment is made in enhanced oil recovery techniques such as gas injection, water-flooding,[1] or microbial enhanced oil recovery.

Because the geology of the subsurface cannot be examined directly, indirect techniques must be used to estimate the size and recoverability of the resource. While new technologies have increased the accuracy of these techniques, significant uncertainties still remain. In general, most early estimates of the reserves of an oil field are conservative and tend to grow with time. This phenomenon is called reserves growth.[2]

Many oil-producing nations do not reveal their reservoir engineering field data and instead provide unaudited claims for their oil reserves. The numbers disclosed by some national governments are suspected of being manipulated for political reasons.[3] …”

List of countries by GDP (nominal)

“… This article includes a list of countries of the world sorted by their gross domestic product (GDP), the market value of all final goods and services from a nation in a given year. The GDP dollar estimates presented here are calculated at market or government official exchange rates.

Several economies which are not considered to be countries (world, the EU, Eurozone, and some dependent territories) are included in the list because they appear in the sources. These economies are not ranked in the charts here, but are listed.

Mark Levin Radio Show – obama is in way over his head we need all hands on deck

Nancy Sinatra – These Boots Are Made For Walking (1966)

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”

~Ayn Rand

Background Articles and Videos

Despite plan, not a single fire boom on hand on Gulf Coast at time of oil spill

By Ben Raines

“…If U.S. officials had followed up on a 1994 response plan for a major Gulf oil spill, it is possible that the spill could have been kept under control and far from land.

The problem: The federal government did not have a single fire boom on hand.

But in order to conduct a successful test burn eight days after the Deepwater Horizon well began releasing massive amounts of oil into the Gulf, officials had to purchase one from a company in Illinois.

When federal officials called, Elastec/American Marine, shipped the only boom it had in stock, Jeff Bohleber, chief financial officer for Elastec, said today.

At federal officials’ behest, the company began calling customers in other countries and asking if the U.S. government could borrow their fire booms for a few days, he said.

A single fire boom being towed by two boats can burn up to 1,800 barrels of oil an hour, Bohleber said. That translates to 75,000 gallons an hour, raising the possibility that the spill could have been contained at the accident scene 100 miles from shore. …”

“..In the days after the rig sank, U.S Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry said the government had all the assets it needed. She did not discuss why officials waited more than a week to conduct a test burn. (Watch video footage of the test burn.)

At the time, former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration oil spill response coordinator Ron Gouguet — who helped craft the 1994 plan — told the Press-Register that officials had pre-approval for burning. “The whole reason the plan was created was so we could pull the trigger right away.”

Gouguet speculated that burning could have captured 95 percent of the oil as it spilled from the well.

Bohleber said that his company was bringing several fire booms from South America, and he believed the National Response Center discovered that it had one in storage.

Each boom costs a few hundred thousand dollars, Bohleber said, declining to give a specific price.

Made of flame-retardant fabric, each boom has two pumps that push water through its 500-foot length. Two boats tow the U-shaped boom through an oil slick, gathering up about 75,000 gallons of oil at a time. That oil is dragged away from the larger spill, ignited and burns within an hour, he said.

The boom can be used as long as waves are below 3 feet, Bohleber said. …”

“In all countries with a settled bureaucracy people used to say: The cabinets come and go, but the bureaus remain.”

“Only to bureaucrats can the idea occur that establishing new offices, promulgating new decrees, and increasing the number of government employees alone can be described as positive and beneficial measures.”

~Ludwig von Mises

FCC Approves Proposed Net Neutrality Rules

FCC Debates Net Neutrality -Full video

The Communicators: Net Neutrality

Mike McCurry on Net Neutrality

Paul Misener of Amazon.com on net neutrality

Q & A: Faceoff between Mike McCurry and Paul Misener

More government regulation and intervention into the economy is the problem not the solution.

The government is attempting to screw the consumer in the name of protecting them from the big bad Internet Service Prodivers or ISPs.

We are from the government and are here to protect you.

Really?

Go take a hike.

Promote competition and investment in the internet or broadband deployment and cut government spending and regulation–abolish the Federal Communications Commission.

The Progressive Radical Socialists are all on the side of network neutrality.

Network neutrality is the hostile takeover of the internet by government regulations.

The Progressive Radical Socialists are true believers in government command and control.

I trust private companies before I would even consider trusting the integrity of the government.

Time for the American people to wake up and speak up.

“Capitalism means free enterprise, sovereignty of the consumers in economic matters, and sovereignty of the voters in political matters. Socialism means full government control of every sphere of the individuals life and the unrestricted supremacy of the government in its capacity as central board of production management.”

“Tyranny is the political corollary of socialism, as representative government is the political corollary of the market economy.”

~Ludwig von Mises

Background Articles and Videos

The Essential Guide to Network Neutrality

A guide to the future of Internet services and the Internet Freedom Preservation Act.

By John Edwards

“…The Case Against Network Neutrality

The nation’s largest ISPs, including AT&T, Time Warner, Verizon, Cox Communications Inc. and Comcast, are the strongest network-neutrality opponents. Yet these firms steadfastly deny that they are trying to hijack the Internet, as some as their critics claim.

The ISPs insist that their primary interest is simply to ensure better and more reliable service by prioritizing content to meet their customers’ needs. They also state that their actions are essential to comprehensive Internet security; they must prevent outlaw services from taking advantage of customers through illegal Net activities, such as phishing sites and intellectual-property-robbing peer-to-peer file-sharing services. Many neutrality opponents also believe they should be able to charge Web-site operators, especially high-bandwidth services like video streamers, for the right to use the ISP’s portion of the network, which feeds content directly to customers.

Neutrality opponents assert that any government measures directed at promoting a so-called “even playing field” would unnecessarily meddle with Net activities and, in effect, place the government in charge of critical aspects of the Web’s design and operation. Such interference, opponents claim, would stifle Internet growth, hinder the roll out of broadband access and tilt the market toward businesses that use the most bandwidth yet pay the least for network costs within a neutral environment.

The Case for Network Neutrality

Supporters of network neutrality include the businesses that have the most to gain from a neutral Internet — companies such as Amazon.com, Google, Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft and Facebook. Also backing the cause are the editorial boards of several major newspapers, including The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle and San Jose Mercury News. Organizations such as the American Library Association, Gun Owners of America, Christian Coalition of America and Consumers Union, as well as Internet pioneer Vint Cerf, are also carrying the “free Internet” banner.

Network-neutrality proponents claim that rather than protecting their customers’ interests, ISPs are trying to squash competition in order to benefit their own Internet services, including email, IP telephony, search technology, news and information content aggregation, classified advertising, and social networking. They argue that by attempting to monopolize both access and content, such firms are essentially “double-dipping.”

According to network-neutrality advocates, the loss of a free and open Internet would lead to less innovation, since individuals and small startups buckle under new service and cost restrictions imposed by ISPs. The biggest losers in this situation will be consumers, who will inevitably face fewer service choices and higher fees, argue neutrality supporters. The national business and financial climate will also suffer, they allege, as Internet innovation and growth slows. …”

SavetheInternet.com on the Hill: Tim Wu’s Statement

Tim Wu on Network Neutrality

Tim Wu, Politics Online Conference March 2008

What is “Net Neutrality?”

Network Neutrality

Timothy Wu

Tim Wu at NCMR 2008

Politics Online 2008 – Broadband Strategy, part 1

Politics Online 2008 – Broadband Strategy, part 2

Politics Online 2008 – Broadband Strategy, part 3

Politics Online 2008 – Broadband Strategy, part 4

Politics Online 2008 – Broadband Strategy, part 5

Background Articles and Videos

Tim Wu

“…Tim Wu (traditional Chinese: 吳修銘) is a professor at Columbia Law School, the chair of media reform group Free Press, and a writer for Slate Magazine.[1] He is best known for popularizing the concept of network neutrality in his paper Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination. The paper considered network neutrality in terms of neutrality between applications, as well as neutrality between data and Quality of Service-sensitive traffic, and proposed some legislation to potentially deal with these issues.[2][3]

Wu’s academic specialties are copyright and telecommunications policy. For his work in this area, Professor Wu was named one of Scientific American’s 50 people of the year in 2006. In 2007 Wu was named one of Harvard University’s 100 most influential graduates by 02138 magazine.[4]

“…

In 2003, Wu contributed to the Howard Dean and John Edwards presidential campaigns.[10] During 2008, Wu served as an adviser to the Barack Obama presidential campaign.[11] …”

“…Wu is credited with popularizing the concept of network neutrality in his 2003 paper Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination. The paper considered network neutrality in terms of neutrality between applications, as well as neutrality between data and Quality of Service-sensitive traffic, and proposed some legislation to potentially deal with these issues.[2][12]

In 2006, Wu wrote “The World Trade Law of Internet Filtering”, which analyzed the possibility of the World Trade Organization treating censorship as a barrier to trade.[13] In June 2007, when Google Inc. lobbied the United States Trade Representative to pursue a complaint against China’s censorship at the WTO, Wu’s paper was cited as a “likely source” for this idea.[14] In 2006 Wu was also invited by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to help draft the first network neutrality rules attached to the AT&T and BellSouth merger.[15]

In 2007, Wu published a paper proposing a “Wireless Carterfone” rule for mobile phone networks[16]; the rule was adopted by the Federal Communications Commission for the 700 MHz spectrum auctions on July 31, 2007, with FCC Commissioner Michael Copps stating: “I find it extremely heartening to see that an academic paper—in this case by Professor Timothy Wu of Columbia Law School—can have such an immediate and forceful influence on policy.”[17] In November 2007 BusinessWeek credited Wu with providing “the intellectual framework that inspired Google’s mobile phone strategy.”[18]

With his Columbia Law School colleagues Professors Scott Hemphill and Clarisa Long, Wu co-directs the Columbia Law School Program on Law and Technology, founded in 2007.[19][20] In August 2007, in collaboration with the University of Colorado School of Law’s Silicon Flatirons Program, the Columbia Law School Program on Law and Technology launched a Beta version of AltLaw, which he produced.[21] …”

Free Press

“…Free Press is a non-partisan media advocacy organization, and by membership the largest such organization in the United States.[citation needed] It was founded by media critic Robert W. McChesney, journalist John Nichols and current executive director Josh Silver. The current chair of Free Press is Columbia Professor Tim Wu. In the 2000s, Free Press has grown into among the most prominent organizations criticizing media consolidation and defending network neutrality. It has a membership of over 500,000, making it in membership terms the largest media advocacy group in the United States.[1] …”

Free Press’ aim is to increase the public’s stake in the debate of appropriate media policy with the goal of creating a more competitive media landscape and promoting a media system more friendly to the public interest. In the period from 2002-2008, Free Press was one of the leading organizations in the Save the Internet campaign and the Stop Big Media coalition. Free Press is also the organizer of the large annual National Conference for Media Reform.

Free Press employs a full time lobbying staff in Washington, D.C. Free Press’ senior lobbyist, Ben Scott, has been described as a “driving force for ‘net neutrality.'” [1]

Free Press

“Free Press

Advocates decentralizing ownership of broadcast media

Stages National Conferences on Media Reform

Free Press is a tax-exempt “media reform” organization co-founded in December 2002 by radical Professor Robert McChesney of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, The Nation magazine’s Washington correspondent John Nichols, and campaign-finance-reform advocate Josh Silver. Free Press shares offices, telephones and directors with the non-tax-exempt “social welfare organization” Free Press Action Fund, which openly engages in political lobbying.

One of Free Press’s projects is the staging of conferences. In November 2003, its first National Conference on Media Reform was held at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. This media reform conference was keynoted by Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) host Bill Moyers and its star was Amy Goodman, host of the national radio program Democracy Now! This conference, as reported by Z Magazine, also prominently featured “El Salvador and Palestine solidarity activists” who “gave updates on their work.”

Free Press’s Second National Conference for Media Reform (held May 13-15, 2005) in St. Louis, Missouri featured the following speakers: Medea Benjamin of Global Exchange and Code Pink; David Brock, head of Media Matters for America; Laura Flanders, author and radio host; Bill Fletcher of TransAfrica Forum; Al Franken of Air America Radio; Amy Goodman; Juan Gonzalez of the New York Daily News; Robert Greenwald, Director of the anti-Rupert Murdoch documentary Outfoxed; author and commentator Jim Hightower; Janine Jackson of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting; author and columnist Naomi Klein; George Lakoff, University of California Berkeley professor and Democratic Party advisor; Robert McChesney; John Nichols; and California Congresswoman Diane Watson, a member of the Progressive Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives. …”

“…Board members of the Free Press Action Fund include McChesney; Nichols; Linda Foley, President of the Newspaper Guild/Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO; and Norman Solomon, Executive Director of the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA), on whose board McChesney sits. Another Free Press Action Fund board member is Cindy Asner, wife of actor Ed Asner. The Asners are activists in Progressive Democrats of America.

Free Press founders McChesney and Nichols have co-authored three books: It’s the Media, Stupid!, Our Media, Not Theirs: The Democratic Struggle Against Corporate Media, and Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy. The authors and their organization are endorsed by leftist professor Howard Zinn: “Free Press is doing the important work of stimulating a national discussion on the role of a free media in this country. It deserves widespread support.”

Free Press receives financial support from the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Glaser Progress Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the Open Society Institute, the Overbrook Foundation, the Philadelphia Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy, the Surdna Foundation, and the Wallace Global Fund. …”

“True, governments can reduce the rate of interest in the short run. They can issue additional paper money.

They can open the way to credit expansion by the banks. They can thus create an artificial boom and the appearance of prosperity.

But such a boom is bound to collapse soon or late and bring about a depression.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government, page 251

The Federal Reserve System is a private banking cartel that sets the price of money, serves as a lender of last resort, regulates member banks, and is the central bank of the United States responsible for the setting and the implemenation of monetary policy, the expansion and contraction of the money supply with the goal of general price level stability.

The Federal Reserve failed to adequately regulate banks in particular large banks.

The Federal Reserve deserves a large portion of the blame for the current financial crisis and recession.

Screw up big time and now the President proposes to expand their role.

Give me a break.

President Obama is bought and paid for by the large Wall Street financial institutions and the banking cartel and will do anything they want.

Thei Federal Reserve System’s incompetence has destroyed trillions in wealth and transfered more wealth from the American people to those to big to fail in the form of bailouts–the crime of the century.

Terminate the tyranny of the banking cartel and abolish the central bank–the Federal Reserve System.

End The Fed!

President Obama Announces Financial Regulation Reform

Dr Yaron Brook of the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights on Glenn Beck show June 18 2009

Jim Rogers on CNBC: ABOLISH THE FEDERAL RESERVE!

Why the Meltdown Should Have Surprised No One

A Recipe for the Next Great Depression

End The Fed: Final Cut

“The interest of the capitalists are scarcely ever represented in monetary policy.”

~Ludwig von Mises, The Theory of Money and Credit, page 414

Background Articles And Videos

Federal Reserve System

“…The Federal Reserve System (also the Federal Reserve; informally The Fed) is the central banking system of the United States. Created in 1913 by the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act (signed by Woodrow Wilson), it is a quasi-public and quasi-private (government entity with private components) banking system[1] that comprises (1) the presidentially appointed Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C.; (2) the Federal Open Market Committee; (3) twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks located in major cities throughout the nation acting as fiscal agents for the U.S. Treasury, each with its own nine-member board of directors; (4) numerous other private U.S. member banks, which subscribe to required amounts of non-transferable stock in their regional Federal Reserve Banks; and (5) various advisory councils. Since February 2006, Ben Bernanke has served as the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Donald Kohn is the current Vice Chairman (Term: June 2006–June 2010).

Summary Of Obama Financial Regulation Plan

–Creates Financial Services Oversight Council, which would coordinate activities among regulators, replacing the President’s Working Group.

–Ensures that any financial firm big enough to pose a risk to the financial system would be heavily regulated by the Federal Reserve, including regular stress tests.

–Gives the Fed oversight over parent companies and all subsidiaries, including unregulated units and those based overseas.

–Says the Treasury will re-examine capital standards for banks and bank-holding companies.

–Tells regulators to issue guidelines on executive compensation, with the goal of aligning pay with long-term shareholder value, including a re-examination of the utility of golden parachutes.

–Creates a new bank agency, the National Bank Supervisor, and kills the Office of Thrift Supervision. The new agency will look over national banks, including federal branches and agencies of foreign banks.

–Requires hedge funds, private-equity funds and venture-capital funds to register with the SEC, allowing the agency to collect data from the firms.

–Subjects hedge funds to new requirements in areas such as record keeping, disclosure and reporting. The oversight would include assets under management, borrowings, off-balance sheet exposures.

–Urges the SEC to give directors of money-market mutual funds the power to suspend redemptions, and take other action to strengthen regulation of money-market mutual funds to prevent runs.

–Beefs up oversight of insurance by creating an office within the Treasury to coordinate information and policy.

–Kicks off a process by which the Treasury and the Department of Housing and Urban Development will figure out the future of mortgage giants Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and the federal home-loan banks. …”

Obama’s new financial regs – worse than we imagined

Rick Moran

“…Hey kids! Let’s create a brand, spanking, new federal bureaucracy to protect consumers of mortgages, credit cards, and other financial instruments from their own stupidity!

That’s just one of the nanny state goodie being proposed by the Obama administration to address what they say were the causes of the financial meltdown.

The plan seeks to overhaul the nation’s outdated system of financial regulations. Senior officials debated using a bulldozer to clear the way for fundamental reforms but decided instead to build within the shell of the existing system, offering what amounts to an architect’s blueprint for modernizing a creaky old building.

The White House makes its case for this approach in an 85-page white paper that describes the roots of the crisis. Gaps in regulation allowed companies to make loans many borrowers could not afford. Funding came from new kinds of investments that were poorly understood by regulators. Big firms paid employees massive bonuses, while setting aside little money to absorb potential losses.

Surely some loans were made by criminals. The laws are already in place to deal with them. But how can you close a “gap” in the stupidity of the borrower? Never fear, the government is here!

The government would create a new agency to protect consumers of mortgages, credit cards and other financial products.

We welcome our ACORN overlords. …”

“…The problem, of course, is vastly expanding the mandate of the Federal Reserve – to give the quasi-independent agency regulatory power not answerable to Congress. If you’re a company and have a complaint about how the Fed is regulating your business, I wish you good luck and bon chance. You will get no satisfaction from our lawmakers.

This is a nightmare for those who value free, independent markets. And it might get worse yet. Interpreting these broad goals will be the job of federal regulators who may take the opportunity to impose even more draconian restrictions. …”

Obama and Democrats are Responsible: Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac

Bill Allison on Lou Dobbs 9/26/08

Rooting Out the Reason for the Bailout

by Rich Tucker

“…The federal Community Reinvestment Act (passed during the Carter administration and amended during the Clinton administration), Liebowitz writes, tossed aside “traditional lending requirements such as requiring a down payment or limiting mortgage payments to 28 percent of income.” These requirements, according to requirements issued by the Boston branch of the Federal Reserve, were “arbitrary” and “outdated.”

The new policy “worked.” Home-ownership rates jumped, starting in 1995. Of course, with more buyers chasing (roughly) the same number of housing units, prices started soaring, as the law of supply and demand would predict.

Eventually prices rose too high, creating the bubble that popped last year (as all financial bubbles do, eventually). On the way up, government-sponsored enterprise Fannie Mae bragged in a 2002 report that it had succeeded in “fundamentally altering the terms upon which mortgage credit had been offered in the United States from the 1960s through the 1980s.” The company called that “mortgage innovation,” but it was an innovation that eventually caused today’s collapse. …”

HOUSE OF CARDS

LIBERALS FUELED WALL ST. WOES

“…HOW did America wind up in its worst financial crisis in decades? Sen. Barack Obama explained it this way last week: “When sub-prime-mortgage lending took a reckless and unsustainable turn, a patchwork of regulators systematically and deliberately eliminated the regulations protecting the American people.”

That’s exactly backward. Mortgage lending took that “reckless and unsustainable turn” because of regulation – regulation driven by liberals and progressives, not free-market “deregulators.”

The mortgage market was humming along just fine when, in the late 1980s, progressives decided that it needed to be “fixed.” Their complaint: Some ethnic groups got approved for mortgages at lower rates than others.

In reality, mortgage lenders were simply being prudent – taking care to provide mortgages to those who could best afford to make the payments. …”

“…Now that the popped bubble has left us swimming in foreclosures, the supporters of loosened credit standards seem shy about taking credit for their “mortgage innovations.” Instead, they blame subprime lenders for becoming “predatory” – when they were simply taking the Boston Fed rules to their logical conclusion while broadening the mortgage market.

Investors holding mortgage-based assets now want out. Perhaps they deserve a $700 billion refund – since they were sold a bill of goods by “progressive” politicians, academics and government officials who, in the hope of remaking society, insisted that loans based on relaxed underwriting standards were sound. ”

I am urging all conservatives and libertarians in Congress to vote against the bailout bill, Democrats and Republicans.

Something does not smell right. The complete story is simply not being told and the American elites are pulling a fast one to avoid blame for government intervention in the mortage home loan market.

Warren Buffet gives some clues.

Sep 24 – Warren Buffett – Bailout must – market meltdown

The American people need to be leveled with and not given only part of the story.

I am not buying the fear mongering scenario that all business will stop if this bill is not passed.

Banks are in the business of lending money and guess what, they are still lending.

The very people who bear much of the responsibility for failing to properly regulate both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are writing much of this bill–Senator Chris Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank–and the Democratic Party.

I smell a fix.

The American people need someone on the inside to blow the whistle on this one.

As a minimum the American people or taxpayers should receive a deal equal to that Warren Buffett got with Goldman Sachs.

Buffett on Goldman Deal

Ron Paul Bashes Warren Buffet & Bailout Plan!

Those financial institutions that are facing liquidity problems and possible bankruptcy as a result of investing in mortaged backed securities and derivative securities should be provided additional capital through the Federal Reserve in exchange for Preferred Stock.

These companies would have five years to retire the Preferred Stock by seeking additional capital in the financial markets. These companies should pay dividends on the Preferred Stock to the Federal Reserve to be transferred to the Treasury Department as payment for the use of the capital.

The US real estate markets both residential and commercial should be back to normal by than and the problem securites should have recovered most of their value.

Buffett boosts Goldman Sachs with $5-billion investment

Berkshire also will get warrants to buy up to $5 billion of Goldman common shares.

The deal, announced after markets closed, amounts to a huge vote of confidence by Buffett in the investment banking titan, at a time when investors remain spooked about the future of Wall Street.

“Goldman Sachs is an exceptional institution,” Buffett said in a statement. “It has an unrivaled global franchise, a proven and deep management team and the intellectual and financial capital to continue its track record of outperformance.”

Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein said the firm considered Buffett’s capital infusion “a strong validation of our client franchise and future prospects.” Goldman also said it would raise another $2.5 billion by selling more common stock to the public.

Any Democrat or Republican that votes for the current bailout bill should be defeated in November.

The American people will take out their anger and outrage by voting out of office any incumbent that votes for the bill and was responsible for not regulating and exercising oversite over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Only you can prevent socialism in America.

Paul Newman – The Hustler 1961 Final Game

Background Articles and Videos

THE REAL SCANDAL

HOW FEDS INVITED THE MORTGAGE MESS

“…PERHAPS the greatest scandal of the mort gage crisis is that it is a direct result of an intentional loosening of underwriting standards – done in the name of ending discrimination, despite warnings that it could lead to wide-scale defaults.

At the crisis’ core are loans that were made with virtually nonexistent underwriting standards – no verification of income or assets; little consideration of the applicant’s ability to make payments; no down payment.

Most people instinctively understand that such loans are likely to be unsound. But how did the heavily-regulated banking industry end up able to engage in such foolishness?

From the current hand-wringing, you’d think that the banks came up with the idea of looser underwriting standards on their own, with regulators just asleep on the job. In fact, it was the regulators who relaxed these standards – at the behest of community groups and “progressive” political forces.

In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of “redlining” – claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.

In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications – but the overwhelming reason wasn’t racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tend to have weaker finances. …”

Dennis Lockhart on current mortgage-credit crisis – PART 1

Dennis Lockhart on current mortgage-credit crisis – PART 2

Dennis Lockhart on current mortgage-credit crisis – PART 3

Dennis Lockhart on current mortgage-credit crisis – PART 4

Dennis Lockhart on current mortgage-credit crisis – PART 5

Dennis P. Lockhart

“Dennis P. Lockhart (born February 1, 1947) is President and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. He assumed office on March 1, 2007.

From 2003 to 2007, Lockhart served on the faculty of the Master of Science in Foreign Service Program at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service. He also was an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies. From 2001 to 2003, Lockhart was managing partner at the private equity firm Zephyr Management, L.P.. Prior to this position, he worked for 13 years at Heller Financial, where he served as executive vice president and director of the parent company and as president of Heller International Group.

Lockhart held various positions, both domestic and international, with Citicorp/Citibank (now Citigroup) between 1971 and 1988. Early in his career with Citibank, he served in Saudi Arabia, Greece and Iran. From 1978 to 1986, he served in Atlanta as senior corporate officer of the Southeast office of Citibank. From 1987 to 1988, he was head of the firm’s Latin American debt-to-equity swap investment program. He was also a member of the board of directors of several companies

Lockhart earned his B.A. from Stanford University in 1968 and his M.A. from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in 1971. His daughter, Dorsey Lockhart, is a Presidential Management Fellow at the State Department in Washington, D.C. …”